BW Legal got it wrong again. We are operating lawfully.

It is one of the glories of this country that every now and then one of its citizens is prepared to take a stand against the big battalions of government or industry. Such a person is Mr Jackson Yamba from Contestor Legal Services.

Before the County Court at Bournemouth, BW legal and Britannia Parking Group Ltd ‘s false allegations made against Contestor Legal Services and Mr Jackson Yamba, CEO of Contestor Legal Services were all dismissed. In a nutshell, Mr Jackson Yamba worked for BW legal for almost 2 years as a Senior Paralegal. Mr Jackson Yamba resigned from his role in September 2020 to start disputing parking charges issued unfairly and unlawfully against members of the public. BW legal were fully aware that Mr Jackson Yamba was a former Barrister in a different Jurisdiction. It was on the basis of his past experience and qualifications that he was offered the senior role of a paralegal. 26 days after resigning from his role, Mr Yamba received on Saturday 25/09/2021 at 15:02 a threatening letter from BW legal outlining their concerns as follows:

…Our concern, as you will no doubt appreciate, is that during the course of your employment at BW Legal, you have acquired a significant amount of knowledge…

In the County Court at Bournemouth, BW legal and Britannia Parking Group Ltd falsely accused Mr Jackson Yamba and Contestor Legal Services for inter alia holding himself out as a Barrister in England and Wales and conducting litigation. It was BW Legal's misguided understanding that the word “former” also meant “current” and Civil Law Jurisdiction included England and Wales. However, this was not our understanding nor the Court. BW legal and Britannia Parking Group Ltd were represented by a very experienced Barrister, Mr John Boumphrey, called at Bar since 1992

The Court was able to identify the problem at a glance that :

:…Now my first observation with regard to this, and I go back to the clear, long relationship, if I can call it that, which has been in existence between Mr Yamba and the Claimant’s solicitors, is my starting point here is of course the Claimant’s solicitors would have never been under any illusion that Mr Yamba was a qualified barrister. They employed him for a period of time, they would have quite clearly known at the point of employment that he was not a qualified barrister in England and Wales, and of course that does not change the allegation that he has held himself out to be, but I simply make it clear that the Claimant’s solicitors were obviously aware even if he was, that he was not, from the outset, unless something had, he had miraculously managed to qualify in very short order..”

It is worth pointing out that all the allegations falsely made against us were very serious. The seriousness of the allegations was confirmed by the Court:

“…Now, there are various allegations made against Mr Yamba by the Claimants in this matter and they are not to be taken lightly. One thing I would make it clear at the outset is what this Court is not here to do today is to make any finding or otherwise in relation to any potential criminal aspect to Mr Yamba’s actions. I note that there are offences which may be considered criminal, in the allegations made against him, but that is not a matter for me to deal with today. That would clearly be a matter for either the CPS or the police or indeed the relevant regulatory bodies to deal with as and when a referral is made to them. It may be, depending upon my decision today, that the Claimants invite me to make that referral, but we will deal with that if we get there…

In reaching its final verdict, the Court concluded that Mr Jackson Yamba was able to appear as a Lay Representative pursuant to the Lay Representative Order 1999, and carry out reserved instrument pursuant Schedule 3(7)(c) of Legal Services Act 2007 under the small claim track as an exempted person.

I am satisfied, as I have said, that he has the ability to appear as a lay representative before this Court, I have also outlined that I am satisfied that he, or certainly on the evidence I have before me today and what has been put before me today, that he has not held himself out to be a barrister, that he has not misrepresented with regard to his current studying arrangements

…Now, it seems to me on the issue of whether Mr Yamba was conducting litigation in this instance is it is very finely balanced. I have been taken to Schedule 3 of the Legal Services Act and I must say I have taken some time to consider it very carefully, and what Mr Yamba is effectively saying is that under Schedule 3, I think it is 3(7)(c), what the Act says is that a person is exempt to the extent that the activity carried on by the person is also a reserved legal activity within subsection (8), and he refers to paragraph (c) where it states that the person is an exempt person in relation to the activity by virtue of paragraph 1 or 2 of this Schedule. 32. Now paragraph 1 or 2 of that Schedule is the part that deals with rights of audience and of course we have established that under that Mr Yamba does have a right of audience and so whilst, as I say, I think it is a particularly fine line, I am also conscious of the fact that far more impressive legal minds than my own have struggled with this concept over the years and have stated that they consider that the definitions of conducting litigation are somewhat inadequate, but it seems to me upon my reading of the Act that on balance whilst I can fully appreciate the Claimant’s view on this matter, and I must say to a degree I did share it, but it seems to me that actually Mr Yamba is permitted to carry out that act in this instance

The verdict is a clear indication that Contestor Legal Services is operating lawfully in providing legal assistance and representation to any member of the public who cannot afford Solicitors or Barristers. It is our view that BW legal and their client maliciously made these false allegations to stop us from providing legal assistance to our clients. In their submissions, BW legal and Britannia Parking Group Ltd were seeking that Mr Jackson Yamba should be found in contempt of Court and be referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions for criminal charges. This was also the expectation of Mr Tito Ponzetta, Managing Director of Total Parking Solutions Ltd, another client of BW legal, who contacted us through our LinkedIn account that : “…We are fully aware of legal proceedings already pending against you”.

Assuming that the allegations were true or proven, Mr Jackson Yamba could have potentially ended up in prison for 2 years. Unfortunately, BW legal and Britannia Parking Group Ltd were faced with a robust legal argument from us. They have attempted but lamentably failed to stop us in disputing parking charges issued unfairly and unlawfully to our current and potential clients.

Unsure if you are liable to pay a Parking Charge Notice? We have a significant amount of knowledge to assist you in disputing the parking charge.

Please contact us immediately on 03301139604 or via email : legalteam@contestorlegal.co.uk. We have a success rate of 98% and we hold professional indemnity insurance.